High Court To Weigh Law Outlawing Guns Near Schools

The U.S. Supreme Court last week agreed to decide the
constitutionality of a 1990 federal law that bans the possession of
guns within 1,000 feet of a school.

The law, known as the Gun-Free School Zones Act, was struck down
last fall by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, which
said that Congress exceeded its authority under the commerce clause of
the Constitution when it made gun possession near public or private
schools a federal offense. (See Education Week, Oct. 6, 1993.)

The High Court on April 18 agreed to hear the Clinton
Administration's appeal in United States v. Lopez (Case No.
93-1260).

"The long tradition of federal regulation of firearms activity and
Congress's repeated findings regarding the effects of that activity on
interstate commerce adequately support'' the law on gun-free school
zones, Solicitor General Drew Days argued in the government's petition
to the High Court.

The Fifth Circuit Court ruled that in enacting the law, Congress
failed to establish a connection between gun possession near schools
and interstate commerce. Most federal gun laws relate to the sale of
such weapons, the court pointed out.

"Both the management of education and the general control of simple
firearms possession by ordinary citizens have traditionally been a
state responsibility,'' the appeals court said.

The court added that a federal gun-possession law might be sustained
if Congress made adequate legislative findings showing a connection to
interstate commerce.

The Senate last fall added language to the crime bill that includes
legislative findings that gun possession near schools affects
interstate commerce.

The government's brief suggested that even if the crime bill finally
passed by Congress includes such findings, the High Court case would
not be moot because the validity of prosecutions under the 1990 law
would still be at issue.

'A Gang War'

The appeals court overturned the gun-possession conviction ofAlfonso
Lopez Jr., who was a senior at Edison High School in San Antonio in
1992 when he was caught with a handgun.

On the basis of an anonymous tip, school authorities confronted Mr.
Lopez, who said he was being paid to deliver the weapon to another
person for use in a "gang war.''

Mr. Lopez was convicted by a federal judge of violating the
gun-free-zones law and was sentenced to six months in prison.

In papers filed with the Supreme Court, the lawyer for Mr. Lopez
argued that the federal measure is "functionally superfluous'' because
it applies only to adults, not juveniles, and that state laws provide
adequate legal protections against gun possession near schools.

The federal measure does not "significantly increase safety in and
around schools,'' said John R. Carter, an assistant federal public
defender in San Antonio, in his brief on behalf of Mr. Lopez.

The federal courts have split on the question of Congress's
authority to enact the law establishing the gun-free zones. The U.S.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld the law in December, and
various federal district courts have ruled opposite ways on the
question.

Sen. Herb Kohl, D-Wis., one of the original sponsors of the
legislation, said the Fifth Circuit Court's decision "goes against
common sense and precedent.''

"Every day, more than 200,000 kids carry firearms into school,''
Senator Kohl said in a prepared statement. "Congress tried to do
something about it, and I'm hopeful the Supreme Court will insure our
authority to legislate in this area.''

The Court will hear the case during its next term, which begins in
October.

Christian Videotape

In separate action last week, the High Court declined to hear the
appeal of a Michigan girl who sued school officials when a teacher
refused to allow her to show a videotape of herself singing a Christian
song.

The 2nd-grade student, Kelly DeNooyer, chose the videotape as her
"special belonging'' from home to show classmates under a program
designed to promote students' self-esteem.

The girl's parents sued the Livonia, Mich., district, alleging that
her rights of free speech and free exercise of religion were
violated.

A federal judge ruled in favor of the school officials, saying that
they had a "legitimate pedagogical concern'' about showing the tape
during class.

The case was DeNooyer v. Livonia Public Schools (No. 93-1323).

Vol. 13, Issue 31

Notice: We recently upgraded our comments. (Learn more here.) If you are logged in as a subscriber or registered user and already have a Display Name on edweek.org, you can post comments. If you do not already have a Display Name, please create one here.

Ground Rules for Posting
We encourage lively debate, but please be respectful of others. Profanity and personal attacks are prohibited. By commenting, you are agreeing to abide by our user agreement.
All comments are public.